US NEWS RANKINGS leak (2011)

[CJScalia]

then what do they teach?

The top schools generally have a more "philosophical" approach to the subjects. I'm not really sure how to properly put the difference into words, but yeah, they have a lot less focus on practical aspects of being a lawyer, or passing the bar. They assume you fix that yourself. The very best place to tell the difference is really in a Civ Pro class, and just seeing how little time they spend on the FRCP compared to what "lower ranked" schools do. Whether this is a good thing or not for their students can be (and consistently is) debated.

[the white rabbit]

Yes you should throw in common sense

Common sense is something that our intuition tells us is true, even though we can't articulate why exactly it's true.  Therefore, a poor substitute for facts.  Now when the facts and your common sense tell you things that contradict each other, maybe you need to step back and ask yourself if you're misreading the facts.  But if they tell you the same thing then it's better to rely on the facts.  They're generally more convincing when you're trying to persuade someone to agree with your version of the story.

U.S. News is not data at all.

Actually, it is data because there's actually a methodology there that they use to come up with their numbers.  You can argue about the quality of their methodology and whether it actually leads to useful conclusions, but you can't argue that it's actual data.  

they do give bar passage rate a whopping 2% consideration in the rankings.

Here for example, you're not arguing that the bar passage data is not data; you're just arguing about their methodology, i.e. you think it should be worth more than 2%.  That's different from saying it's not data.

And as I've said elsewhere, bar passage isn't all that relevant in terms of ranking schools at the very top, because they're not trying to teach people how to pass the bar, and year-to-year variations in their bar passage rate relative to each other don't really reflect year-to-year variation in their quality relative to each other.  Maybe for law schools that aren't at the very top level it would make sense to weigh bar passage more heavily, but at the top ten schools they just expect you to learn all that stuff the month or two before the bar.

other measurements are completely subjective and based on unidentified people.  

People's opinions are subjective, that's true.  On the other hand, when you aggregate a large number of opinions on the relative value of something, you're probably going to get something close to the actual value of the thing.  Or so says the theory behind the stock market, anyway.  

You are correct that they need to give a better idea of whom they're asking though.

Then acceptance and placement rates are so blatantly tweeked by every school that it is not even worth mentioning.

Every school, really?  Aren't you just generalizing based on some anecdotes you've heard?  You think that Harvard and Yale are tweaking their placement numbers?

You should use your common sense when picking a school, if you your choices are between Stanford and Williamette go to Stanford.

The only reason why this works, as I've explained before, is because common sense and the data both point in the same direction: Stanford is superior to Williamette on most measures, so the data tells you the same thing that your common sense does.  In your other example, there was some data indicating that the transfer made sense, i.e. the destination school's higher ranking, but on the other hand there was probably also data arguing against the transfer, i.e. a minimal difference in terms of job placement.

[the white rabbit]

then what do they teach?

Mostly, they talk about why the law is the way it is, rather than what it actually is.

The idea is that the latter is just memorization, and so can be learned fairly easily.

[cooleylawstudent]

so"philosophy"....basicly they BS instead of teaching you the facts. gotcha.

[the white rabbit]

so"philosophy"....basicly they BS instead of teaching you the facts. gotcha.

Your knee-jerk disparaging attitude is funny. 

But yes.  I mean why waste time on the easy stuff?  I mean it's all written down. 

[CJScalia]

so"philosophy"....basicly they BS instead of teaching you the facts. gotcha.

I do understand that you're doing your very best to be a troll, but I have to say, you're starting to be a living, talking, breathing confirmation about every stereotype and joke I've ever heard about Cooley.

[CooleyGrad]

so"philosophy"....basicly they BS instead of teaching you the facts. gotcha.

I do understand that you're doing your very best to be a troll, but I have to say, you're starting to be a living, talking, breathing confirmation about every stereotype and joke I've ever heard about Cooley.

They don't even go to cooley...

[Mr. Hart]

so"philosophy"....basicly they BS instead of teaching you the facts. gotcha.

I do understand that you're doing your very best to be a troll, but I have to say, you're starting to be a living, talking, breathing confirmation about every stereotype and joke I've ever heard about Cooley.

  does not go to Cooley. He is just posting flames.

[cooleylawstudent]

name one thing that I said which has been impossible to be true and could only be a "flame"? 

[cooleylawstudent]

please we all know that you are just some punk "michigan" student hopeing to transfer to our shinny new building in annarbor and leave your shame behind you. It's ok, we'll get rid of the brainwashing they did to you son, it's all going to be ok......your safe now....

so"philosophy"....basicly they BS instead of teaching you the facts. gotcha.

I do understand that you're doing your very best to be a troll, but I have to say, you're starting to be a living, talking, breathing confirmation about every stereotype and joke I've ever heard about Cooley.

  does not go to Cooley. He is just posting flames.